12 April 2007

The 2016 Olympics - it's right around the corner. On Saturday the US Olympic Committee will decide whether their official entry for the 2016 Olympics will be Los Angeles or Chicago. With The Animal hailing from Chicago, and The Sheriff from Los Angeles, LIO thought it would be a great opportunity for a debate. Listen up USOC: One of us has the answer for you!

THE CASE FOR CHICAGO

Let’s face it, with the world’s perception of America right now only slightly higher than Al Sharpton’s view of Don Imus, the United States has an uphill battle ahead in getting the 2016 Summer Games. Thus, to have any type of shot of winning against a field that will include Tokyo, Rome, and Madrid, the USOC is going to have to put together a unique bid to sway voters from some of the world’s most powerhouse cities.

That bid is Chicago.

With a world that views America as bigoted, the only way the US can convince the IOC to head back into the land of the Red, White, and Blue would be to head to a place with some Midwestern values. As for the celeb-driven bid from Los Angeles, do you really think the rest of the world wants to give them more exposure?

In Chicago, you have a city that is both big enough to be a world-class destination yet small enough to fully transform itself into a manageable games. The Chicago bid has most of its venues within a few miles of each other and right by the lakefront. The Los Angeles bid has swimmers sleeping at UCLA and competing in Long Beach. Anyone who has taken a look at the 405 knows that on a weekday afternoon that might as well be in different states.

And, speaking of transportation, do you really think the global-warming consensus world would elect a place to hold an Olympics without a significant public transportation system? The USOC might as well let Butte, Montana be its bid, because it would have as good of a chance of winning the general election as the already two-time host.

While Los Angeles is a great city, its bid mostly is some agglomerated some spread out venues slapped together into a nice booklet for the IOC. On the other hand, Chicago has put together a cohesive package that has a chance to realistically bring the games back to the States.

35 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Chicago does not have any fucking midwest values. Chicago is "every man for himself," pretty much just like L.A.

I am so sick of people suggesting that Chicago has that "midwest charm." Bull. Shit. Chicago is a big city that just happens to be in the midwest. Chicagoans would just as soon run you off the road and watch your car burst into flames than look at you.

Speaking of the traffic, everything would STOP if Chicago got the Olympics.

Speaking of the traffic, everything would STOP if Chicago got the Olympics.

This is correct. Traffic in Chicago, despite L.A.'s reputation, is MUCH worse than it is in Los Angeles. Virtually every freeway comes through downtown, and that's not a good thing.

On top of that, you've got the brilliant engineers who decided that not only are exits on the left a good idea, but it would also be a good idea to take away a lane at the same time.

Chicago freeways were designed by people who had invested heavily in public transportation, and L.A.'s public transportation was designed by people who had invested heavily in freeways and the auto industry.

Chicago should get it. It is the best place to be in the summer time. There is so much to offer and it is a beautiful city. Traffic will blow anywhere the Olympics are, so don't be a douche. The whole charm is bs. Chicago has the generic big city mentality but the lakefront is great

Chicago has the facilities and can build what else it needs because it also...SPACE! LA is the pavement capital of the world. Indeed, it's designed for 10 million cars. And its public transit answer to congestion? BUSES! LA, where I live now, and Chicago, where I come from and wish I could go back to, are totally different in important ways.

Culturally, Chicago is a friendlier city, it's more metropolitan, more "downtown." People watch baseball games on rooftops and there's bars everywhere to watch games. People mingle.

In LA, everybody drives and ignores each other. Every house has a gate. For all the sun, it's a very cold place to live.

As far as hosting the Olympic games, LA would have to pledge to finally build rapid-transit, of which it has NONE! Chicago has the L trains, the subways, the Metra rail (for the suburbs) and even Amtrak access for people from Wisconsin and Indiana. It also has 2 international airports with the capacity to handle the passengers. As a city, it's far better organized than Los Angeles.

Finally, it comes down to facilities. Los Angeles would have to rehab its Olympic stadium where the Trojans play football. And it no longer has the capacity necessary for opening ceremonies, so they'd have to build another stadium for that (or use the Rose Bowl.) Anybody ever driven from Westwood to the Rose Bowl? Getting around this city is a nightmare. GO CHICAGO!

Have you ever been here in the summer? When the humidity isn't stifling, it's raining. It's awesome for the two weeks in May and the two weeks in October that aren't brutally hot and humid. Otherwise, it sucks.

And if you make outdoor plans, you better have a contingency. At least in L.A. you can make a tee time in the summer and know you aren't going to get rained out.

Chicago will get the nod from the USOC because Chicago knows how to get things done, be them legitimate or not. Also, we all know Daley has his tricks and will still be the Mayor in 2016 so the USOC will be comfortable w/ the pick.

Chicago doesn't have the vanity of LA which I think works in its favor. It also has a compact games location, adequate public transportation, great summer weather (I have no idea where you get the idea that it rains all the time and it's humid. It's beautiful here for most of the summer except August when it can get hot and humid,) and the financial support from the city and state.

I think Chicago is the better city, in general and to host the games, but I hope they don't get it. It'd be a huge headache and we already quality events on a weekly basis over the summer where hundreds of thousands of people come to the lake front.

Chicago vs Los Angeles....I'd say that the biggest thing that Chicago has going for it is that they have shown that although the don't have the facilities built they have shown they can get things done. Mayor for Life Richard M. Daley has the political power to get stuff done through sheer force of will. The business community is ready to back this. As for the highways, I'd have to believe that several of the highways around Chicago are currently being widened or are scheduled to be widened will help relieve traffic a little bit.

Above all else, Chicago is a great sports city with a great history. It has historic franchises and historic ballparks and has been home to some of the great athletes and moments in sports history.

Hmmmmm.....why would that be, you think? It couldn't possibly be because of all the assholes from Chicago and Boston and New York and all the other little shit holes in the midwest and east coast that come out here to Make It Big in the movie and music businesses or move here just because they're tired of shitty weather for 10 months out of the year. Oh no, that couldn't be it.

If this city purged all you Midwest and East Coast assholes who do nothing but complain about how shitty it is out here, this place would be paradise.

Even though I'm from Los Angeles, I think Chicago should get the Olympics. As a functioning city Chicago kicks LA's ass. LA is ratty, politically fractured, it's facilities are aging, and on top of that the city's traffic is absurd. I've used public transportion everyday during the week for years now and I can tell you that our "system" can't even handle regular traffic, let alone the traffic that the Olympics would bring. How would these people get around? Los Angeles has had it's cake, let Chicago get some.

If you doubt that Chicago left a LASTING impression on the USOC when it visited, watch this and realize that you are dead wrong.

http://www.chicago2016.org/chicago_video.aspx

Sorry, folks, Chicago is getting this bid, and it's one of the only American cities that could steal the Games from Paris or Rome at this point. As long as we are going to get only one more Games for the next 20- years, why not have it be in Chicago?

Chicago has the worst traffic and signage in the world. Lights are no corridated, turn a red signs are labled for wrong time of the day. Skyway is ridculously high and keep people from using it. Until Chicago due something about the traffic. They should not even be considered for 2016 games

Thank you for another excellent article. The place else may anyone get that kind of information in such an ideal approach of writing? I've a presentation subsequent week, and I'm at the search for such info.

Have you ever thought about creating an ebook or guest authoring on other blogs? I have a blog centered on the same information you discuss and would really like to have you share some stories/information.I know my readers would enjoy your work. If you're even remotely interested, feel free to shoot me an e-mail.

Hello There. I discovered your blog the usage of msn.That is a really neatly written article. I'll be sure to bookmark it and come back to read extra of your useful info. Thank you for the post. I'll definitely comeback.

hey there and thank you for your information – I have definitely picked up something new from right here. I did however expertise a few technical points using this website, since I experienced to reload the web site a lot of times previous to I could get it to load properly.

I had been wondering if your hosting is OK? Not that I am complaining, but slow loading instances times will often affect your placement in google and could damage your quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords.Well I'm adding this RSS to my e-mail and could look out for a lot more of your respective exciting content. Ensure that you update this again soon.